GE Energy

GE Perspectives Advanced IGCC/Hydrogen Gas Turbine Development

Reed Anderson
Senior Program Manager Technology External Programs

1. This material is based upon work supported by the Department of Energy under Award Number DE-FC26-05NT42643 2. This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof.

Copyright 2010 General Electric Company

October 2010, UTSR

IGCC with CCS Part of the Solution for the Carbon Constrained World
Impact on Emissions
Existing Coal U.S. Average New Coal IGCC or PC IGCC with CCS CC% GTSC (FA) GTCC (FA) 0 500 1000 65% 50%
eff = 45% eff = 40% eff = 33%

Technology Available

90%

Coal Natural Gas

Thermal Efficiency Indicated (xx%) CC = Carbon Capture %

1500

2000

2500

CO2 Emission Rate (lbs/MW-hr)

References: DOE NETL; EIA; IEA and GE Energy Internal Data

2 GE 7F Syngas Units Shipped in 2010 to Duke Edwardsport for Operation in 2012

So Whats the Hold Up?

2

Copyright 2010 General Electric Company

October 2010, UTSR

Current Barriers Cost & Policy

With existing technology, adding CCS to an IGCC plant increases COE beyond what most markets are currently willing to pay. Uncertainty with respect to indemnity, etc. on CO2 storage Technology Improvements and Legislative Action on CO2 Needed
HHV Efficiency, %

Impact of CCS on Output

650

Output, MW

600

550

GE EPRI
500 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

CO2 Capture %

Impact of CCS on Efficiency

39% 37%

Carbon Pricing Storage Clarity More efficiency & output to lower $/kW

35%

33%

31%

As Engineers & Scientists We Can Be A Key Part of the Solution

GE EPRI
29% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

CO2 Capture %
Sources: GE Internal Study, 2007 and EPRI IGCC Design Considerations for CO2 Capture: Engineering and Economic Assessment of IGCC Coal Power Plants for near-term Deployment, 2008 3

Copyright 2010 General Electric Company

October 2010, UTSR

Gas Turbine Technology Advancements High Leverage, High Impact on IGCC Plant

Technology advancements in the gas turbine propagate through the rest of the plant:
More efficient GTs use less fuel, require smaller, less costly gasification systems Advanced GTs could enable improved ST operation Advanced combustion systems requiring less diluent for NOx control enables increased efficiency levels and improved plant integration flexibility
4

Copyright 2010 General Electric Company

October 2010, UTSR

DOE Advanced H2/IGCC GT Program

DOE goals
Performance: +2 to 3 % pts efficiency by 2010 +3 to 5 % pts efficiency (total) by 2015 Emissions: 2 ppm NOx by 2015 Fuel flexibility Syngas & H2 Cost: Contribute to IGCC capital cost reduction

Key Technologies
Combustion Turbine Materials Systems
em iss eff ions ici en cy ou tpu co t st
12 2013 - TBD

Program timeline
05 06 07 08 09 10 11

Phase I
Conceptual

Phase II
Component Validation & Development

Phase III
(Not currently awarded) Final Design & Field Validation
5

Copyright 2010 General Electric Company

October 2010, UTSR

Systems Analysis and Performance Validation

Translate Goals in to Key Plant Level, CC Level, and GT Level Parameters Create Baseline Performance Models & Understand Gaps/Sensitivities Quantify Benefits of Turbine Technology Improvements Recommend Turbine Technology Design Path Re-evaluate and Adjust Plan If Needed As Results of R&D Are Obtained
COAL Water SCRUBBER SCRUBBER SYNGAS HT FW HEATER ACID GAS Absorber ACID GAS Removal GASIFIER CO2 SHIFT CO2 SHIFT

Raw Syngas

RGC

CGC

Capability Flow-Up

O2

SLAG CO2 ACID GAS Absorber Absorber ACID GAS Removal FW HEATER COAL Water O2 CO2 SHIFT CO2 SHIFT GASIFIER SLAG Air Extraction SCRUBBER SYNGAS HT

Sulfur

RGC

CGC

Raw Syngas PROCESS STEAM

IGCC Plant Level

Air

Clean Syngas EXH

Requirements Flow-Down

Combined Cycle Level

O2

Air Separation Unit

Gas Turbine Generator

HRSG

STEAM

Steam Turbine Generator

EXH

N2

Syngas Fuel

Gas Turbine Generator

HRSG
STEAM

Gas/Steam Turbine Level

BALANCE OF PLANT AUXILIARIES (COAL PREP, COOLING SYSTEM, UTILITIES)

Copyright 2010 General Electric Company

October 2010, UTSR

Estimated Project Benefits: Current Status

Efficiency
Plant Efficiency HHV

Line of Sight to Program Efficiency Goal (+ 3 to 5 pts) NOx emissions of 2ppm CO2 emissions reduction consistent with 90% Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) Level CCS Cost Penalty Neutralized ($/kW basis)

No CCS
2015

CCS

2010 base

Program Technology Improvements CCS Penalty 2015 CCS 2010 CCS Base CCS GT Technology

Cost
No CCS CCS
Base CCS

% Change in Plant Cost

CCS Penalty Base Program Technology Improvements 2010

2010 CCS

2015 CCS

NOTES: Values assume use of Advanced Combustion System and SCR

2015

GT Technology 7

Copyright 2010 General Electric Company

October 2010, UTSR

Combustion Challenges
Entitlement (perfectly premixed) NOx Data
target range

NOx Flashback Dynamics Fuel Flexibility

4.75

2.75

NOx @ 15% O2 (ppmvd)

6.75

2ppm

0.75

~ ~
Tflame (F)

NG

H2

Baseline Nozzle

Improved Nozzle
Natural Gas

100% H2 C-Free SG + N2 Syngas

Copyright 2010 General Electric Company

October 2010, UTSR

Combustion Development
Technology Basics
Modeling & Design Entitlement Data Concept Characteristics

2010 Focus
Nozzle Scale
NG / Syngas / High H2 Emissions, Dynamics, Lean Blow Out

Full Can Scale

NG / Syngas / High H2 Combustor Performance

Gas Turbine
Simple & Combined Cycle Part load to Full Load

Fundamental Research

Copyright 2010 General Electric Company

October 2010, UTSR

Combustion Development Status

NOx @ 15% O2 [ppmvd]

Extensive Modeling & Testing at Component Scale Best Concepts Carried Forward for Full Can Multi Nozzle Testing
Single digit NOx emissions at F-Class + temperatures and pressures Promising operability and dynamics on hydrogen, natural gas, and syngas 60+ hours operation, multiple 6-hour blocks at full load

Target Range

Entitlement - High N2 in Fuel Single Nozzle - High N2 in Fuel Full Can - Low N2 in Fuel Full Can - High N2 in Fuel

NOx Emissions vs. Temperature

T EXIT [F]

Next Steps
Further optimize, scale up, and address manufacturability, reliability, durability, etc.
Copyright 2010 General Electric Company

Full Can Testing

10

October 2010, UTSR

Turbine System Goals

HT
Mech

Increasing firing temp and output

Enable advanced materials & coating in IGCC/H2 environment Increased mass flow

Aero

Advanced turbine technology

Reduced cooling flows Reduced leakage/purge flows Advanced aerodynamics for improved turbine efficiency

11

Copyright 2010 General Electric Company

October 2010, UTSR

Turbine Aero & Heat Transfer Development

Cooling Flow Reduction:
Baseline Diffuser Shaped Improved Advanced

Develop & validate advanced cooling schemes

Advanced Film Cooling Hole Shapes

Leakage & Purge Flow Reduction:

Develop & validate improved seal designs Optimize flow geometries to minimize hot gas ingestion
Hybrid Rotating Cascade Rig & CFD

Aerodynamics:
Improve CFD accuracy & validate turbine aero efficiency improvements provided by new technology
Aero Rig Test Parts
12

Copyright 2010 General Electric Company

12

October 2010, UTSR

Heat Transfer Development Status

Advanced Film Cooling Film Effectiveness
New Design Existing (Baseline) Design

TP/S1N Seal
Original Improved

EffectiveArea Area Effective

TP/S1N Seal Parts

Location on Component

Original

TP/S1N Seal

Improved

Achieved target flow reductions for Round 1 Technologies

Airfoil film cooling Transition Piece to Stage 1 Nozzle High Pressure Packing Angel Wing Entitlement supports targeted improvement levels
13

Jugular experiments completed for Round 2 Cooling Technologies

Copyright 2010 General Electric Company

October 2010, UTSR

Aerodynamic Development Status

First round rig testing completed Turbine aerodynamics Diffuser aerodynamics Stable, repeatable performance, consistent with engine experience Results to date support projected performance improvement preparing for next round of testing
Turbine Efficiency
Turbine Aero Validation Rig Test Setup & Results
Natural Gas IGCC Prediction

Data

Turbine Exit Mach Number

Copyright 2010 General Electric Company

14

October 2010, UTSR

Advanced Materials (Coatings)

Goals
Enable higher temperature operation for increased efficiency and output Address unique conditions associated with IGCC environment, validate durability

Field Hardware Inspection

Overall Approach
Characterize the environment and devise representative laboratory tests Benchmark degradation of baseline TBCs and Bond Coats Develop new coatings Downselect to best performers Evaluate best performing TBCs and BCs

Thermal Shock Test

Challenges & Risks

Target conditions beyond current experience
Optimized Coating
Copyright 2010 General Electric Company
15

October 2010, UTSR

Advanced Materials (Coatings) Status

Reproduced damage modes seen on IGCC field hardware Many architectures evaluated over 2+ rounds of optimization Performance improvement demonstrated at targeted operating temperatures Down selections made to final TBCs and bond coats
Field Hardware Inspection Results

Cr-Ti rich particles Cr-Ti rich scale

Cr-Ni-Co rich scale Alumina particles

Ti rich needles Chromium sulfides

50 m

Resistance to Sulfidation
6 Resistance to Sulfidation Attack 5 4 3 2 1 0 (baseline) A B C D E(Prime)

Baseline 8YSZ

New TBC

Modified CoNiCrAlY + X

Microstructural Evolution of TBC After Accelerated Isothermal Exposure

Sulfidation Resistance Test Results

16

Copyright 2010 General Electric Company

October 2010, UTSR

Advanced Materials (Coatings) Next Steps

Evaluate integrated system rig test data for down selected TBCs/BCs Generate design quality data Process optimization
Prelinimary Design Curves

Rig Test Setup

Cycles for a given hot time

FCT Design Curves

Spray Diagnostics For Improved Coating Quality

17

Copyright 2010 General Electric Company

October 2010, UTSR

Summary
GE building on successful field operational experience for gas turbines in IGCC and high Hydrogen fuel applications GE offering IGCC product today, including carbon capture technologies GE working with DOE on gas turbine technology advances for future IGCC products with CCS. Higher efficiency, lower cost, lower emissions Technical Challenges Remain for Future Designs Universities play a critical role in the gas turbine technology R&D process
18

Copyright 2010 General Electric Company

October 2010, UTSR

Acknowledgements
GE would like to extend a special thanks to the US Department of Energy National Energy Technology Laboratory and the following individuals for their past and continued support on the DOE/GE High Hydrogen Program:
Rich Dennis Turbine Technology Manager Office of Fossil Energy US DOE National Energy Technology Laboratory Robin Ames Project Manager Power Systems Division U.S. Department of Energy National Energy Technology Laboratory
19

Copyright 2010 General Electric Company

October 2010, UTSR